This government is a complete shambles

[Heisenberg]

You obviously didn't read or understand my post.

Nice rebuttal.

Shall I explain your own post to you?

Your post was entirely about Sludge and the other Labour voters on here who see only good in Labour and bad in the Tories:

"They simply can't accept that Labour can do anything wrong. Instead people on here are treated like something on the bottom of their shoe and you only have to vote Tory a few times and you are Tory scum."

There's no nuance or balance in your post following that either. There are Conservative voters on here who are just as hyperbolic and and vitriolic as the posters you're referring to... By focussing on one side of the argument you become part of the problem.

The extreme left and extreme right as bad as each other when it comes to defending their parties and attacking their rivals. You failed to mention that.

Have I been... Vindec-ated?

[xsnaggle]

Nice rebuttal.

Shall I explain your own post to you?

Your post was entirely about Sludge and the other Labour voters on here who see only good in Labour and bad in the Tories:

"They simply can't accept that Labour can do anything wrong. Instead people on here are treated like something on the bottom of their shoe and you only have to vote Tory a few times and you are Tory scum."

There's no nuance or balance in your post following that either. There are Conservative voters on here who are just as hyperbolic and and vitriolic as the posters you're referring to... By focussing on one side of the argument you become part of the problem.

The extreme left and extreme right as bad as each other when it comes to defending their parties and attacking their rivals. You failed to mention that.

Have I been... Vindec-ated?

I agree! No I don't! Yes I do! no I dont!

[Vindec]

Nice rebuttal.

Shall I explain your own post to you?

Your post was entirely about Sludge and the other Labour voters on here who see only good in Labour and bad in the Tories:

"They simply can't accept that Labour can do anything wrong. Instead people on here are treated like something on the bottom of their shoe and you only have to vote Tory a few times and you are Tory scum."

There's no nuance or balance in your post following that either. There are Conservative voters on here who are just as hyperbolic and and vitriolic as the posters you're referring to... By focussing on one side of the argument you become part of the problem.

The extreme left and extreme right as bad as each other when it comes to defending their parties and attacking their rivals. You failed to mention that.

Have I been... Vindec-ated?

I note your selective extract from my post. You conveniently omitted the following:

"The evidence is clear from the Labour Party itself. So let's stop the name calling and just let people vote how they vote without criticising individuals for their decisions.

I could vote Labour again but will have to see how things will pan out over the next 4 years. Starmer's made a good start even though I thought he was a bad choice."

There are a couple of things in there. Firstly I have been a Labour voter in the past and secondly I believe Starmer has made a good start even though his appointment defied logic given that he was the architects of one of the main reasons for Labour's failure. Political parties do make strange choices though including the decision by the Conservatives to appoint Boris.

My post doesn't therefore focus on one side of the argument as you state so you are patently wrong in your belief that I am a part of the problem. I wish you would read my entire post before sounding off.

[Heisenberg]

I note your selective extract from my post. You conveniently omitted the following:

"The evidence is clear from the Labour Party itself. So let's stop the name calling and just let people vote how they vote without criticising individuals for their decisions.

I could vote Labour again but will have to see how things will pan out over the next 4 years. Starmer's made a good start even though I thought he was a bad choice."

There are a couple of things in there. Firstly I have been a Labour voter in the past and secondly I believe Starmer has made a good start even though his appointment defied logic given that he was the architects of one of the main reasons for Labour's failure. Political parties do make strange choices though including the decision by the Conservatives to appoint Boris.

My post doesn't therefore focus on one side of the argument as you state so you are patently wrong in your belief that I am a part of the problem. I wish you would read my entire post before sounding off.

"The evidence is clear from the Labour Party itself. So let's stop the name calling and just let people vote how they vote without criticising individuals for their decisions.

I could vote Labour again but will have to see how things will pan out over the next 4 years. Starmer's made a good start even though I thought he was a bad choice."

The whole post was slagging off Labour supporters like Sludge who are one-eyed - you make no reference to another parties voters.

Saying "So let's stop the name calling and just let people vote how they vote without criticising individuals for their decisions." in a post where your sole focus is on Labour voters doesn't help whatever argument you think you're making.

Saying that you "could vote Labour again" is irrelevant to the point you were making

I've now read the entirety of your post 3 f**king times

[xsnaggle]

"The evidence is clear from the Labour Party itself. So let's stop the name calling and just let people vote how they vote without criticising individuals for their decisions.

I could vote Labour again but will have to see how things will pan out over the next 4 years. Starmer's made a good start even though I thought he was a bad choice."

The whole post was slagging off Labour supporters like Sludge who are one-eyed - you make no reference to another parties voters.

Saying "So let's stop the name calling and just let people vote how they vote without criticising individuals for their decisions." in a post where your sole focus is on Labour voters doesn't help whatever argument you think you're making.

Saying that you "could vote Labour again" is irrelevant to the point you were making

I've now read the entirety of your post 3 f**king times

Feck you must be bored!!!!!

[Heisenberg]

Feck you must be bored!!!!!

Bored and busy at the same time. So much so that I've noticed several spelling and grammatical mistakes in my own posts when it's been too late to edit

[xsnaggle]

Bored and busy at the same time. So much so that I've noticed several spelling and grammatical mistakes in my own posts when it's been too late to edit

That's a bugger isn't it? But when they are there at least you know when you've won an argument because people start pointing them out.
Like when you typed.............................. oh never mind.

[Vindec]

"The evidence is clear from the Labour Party itself. So let's stop the name calling and just let people vote how they vote without criticising individuals for their decisions.

I could vote Labour again but will have to see how things will pan out over the next 4 years. Starmer's made a good start even though I thought he was a bad choice."

The whole post was slagging off Labour supporters like Sludge who are one-eyed - you make no reference to another parties voters.

Saying "So let's stop the name calling and just let people vote how they vote without criticising individuals for their decisions." in a post where your sole focus is on Labour voters doesn't help whatever argument you think you're making.

Saying that you "could vote Labour again" is irrelevant to the point you were making

I've now read the entirety of your post 3 f**king times

Perhaps you should read your own post 3 times.

[Heisenberg]

Perhaps you should read your own post 3 times.

OK, you win. I can't compete with that level of wit.

Your post was immensely balanced and I can't believe that I was so wrong to have questioned you; based on the actual words that you used.

[life on mars]

Perhaps you should read your own post 3 times.

he cant he is too much of a moral purists .

[Heisenberg]

he cant he is too much of a moral purists .

You keep using that term but you don't know what it means.

Thanks for pluralising me though. Very kind. I feel very important now.